Rhizomata 6 (1):1-23 (2018)

Vanessa de Harven
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
This paper rehabilitates the Stoic conception of blending from the ground up, by freeing the Stoic conception of body from three interpretive presuppositions. First, the twin hylomorphic presuppositions that where there is body there is matter, and that where there is reason or quality there is an incorporeal. Then, the atomistic presupposition that body is absolutely full and rigid, and the attendant notion that resistance (antitupia) must be ricochet. I argue that once we clear away these presuppositions about body, the foundations of Stoic corporealism fall into place. Body is fundamental (not hylomorphic). The two fundamental principles (archai) are bodies: divine active reason (logos) and passive matter (hulē); and these two bodies are two, not matter and form all over again, nor actual and potential, but agent and patient. The independence of the two archai is no threat to the unity of the cosmos, however, because the Stoic theory of body allows for the complete coextension of the archai. The hylomorphic thinker rightly asks, what relation could be tighter than that of the wax and its shape? The Stoic replies: a causal relation, the interaction of agent and patient completely coextended in a through and through blend.
Keywords Stoic blends  Stoic body  Stoic cosmology  Stoic metaphysics  Stoic physics  antitupia  archai  colocation  corporealism  krasis di’ holou  total blending
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1515/rhiz-2018-0001
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Objects.Kathrin Koslicki - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Stoic Philosophy.John M. Rist - 1969 - London: Cambridge University Press.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Separability and Inseparability of the Stoic Principles.Ian Hensley - 2018 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 56 (2):187-214.
Review of Rene Brouwer, The Stoic Sage, Cambridge, 2014. [REVIEW]Vanessa de Harven - forthcoming - Classical World: A Quarterly Journal on Antiquity 100 (2).
La conception stoïcienne de la matière.Bernard Besnier - 2003 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 1 (1):51-64.
Stoic Gunk.Daniel P. Nolan - 2006 - Phronesis 51 (2):162-183.
Early Stoic Determinism.Susanne Bobzien - 2005 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 4 (4):489-516.
Stoic Souls in Stoic Corpses.Tad Brennan - 2009 - In Dorothea Frede & Burkhard Reis (eds.), Body and Soul in Ancient Philosophy. de Gruyter. pp. 389-408.
Logic: The Stoics (Part Two).Susanne Bobzien - 1999 - In Keimpe Algra, Jonathan Barnes & et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Stoic Souls in Stoic Corpses.Burkhard Reis & Dorothea Frede - 2009 - In Burkhard Reis & Dorothea Frede (eds.), Body and Soul in Ancient Philosophy. Walter de Gruyter.
Reservation in Stoic Ethics.Tad Brennan - 2000 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 82 (2):149-177.
Necessity, Possibility and Determinism in Stoic Thought.Vanessa de Harven - 2016 - In Max Cresswel, Edwin Mares & Adriane Rini (eds.), Logical Modalities from Aristotle to Carnap: The Story of Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 70-90.


Added to PP index

Total views
523 ( #16,480 of 2,499,034 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
38 ( #22,848 of 2,499,034 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes